Suchergebnisse

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis Group in Danish Journal of Archaeology on 20/12/2017, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/21662282.2017.1323992. ; This article focuses upon the delimitation between the separate farm units and the collectively exploited common lands ('allmenninger') in Southeastern Norway during Medieval times. In these commons, various kind of resources – like pastures, woodland and fisheries – were accessible for exploitation by a majority of farmers in the settlement community, but subject to more restrictions than the resources of the 'outlying fields' pertaining to the separate farms. While the majority of the farmers within the community preferred that the extension of the commons should be preserved for their convenience, two groups of farmers might appropriate parts of the original common land area: those cultivating farms bordering to the common area, and who might extend their separate farmland successively into the previous commonly held area, and landless people who wanted to establish new farms ('clearances') within the common land. The legislation was also double and ambiguous. On the one hand it stated that 'the commons [should] stay in the way they have been before'. On the other hand it was declared that a farmer establishing a farm as a new clearing in the commons should become the King's tenant and thus come under his protection. The processes behind the institutionalizing of boundaries between the commons and private farm properties are highlighted through an analysis of settlement development in two municipalities/parishes in Southeastern Norway.

Source at https://doi.org/10.17238/issn2221-2698.2017.27.117 . English version of the article: http://hdl.handle.net/10037/12533 . ; Статья посвящена истории саамов и историческим методам. В реляционном контексте рассматриваются основные результаты и центральные аспекты истории саамов. Какие последствия — как в отношении методологии, так и стилей повествования — эти аспекты имели и должны были иметь для процессов проведения исследований и составления истории саамов? Основное внимание уделяется политике в истории саамов и её исследовании. Рассматриваются вопросы, кому «разрешено» составлять историю саамов и выбирать способ проведе-ния исследований с целью удовлетворения различных социально-культурных потребностей саамов. Рассматривается история саамов в целом и возможности реализации более ограниченных усилий по представлению сведений о саамских культурных практиках, их традициях и опыте отношений с другими народами. В заключение представлены методологические подходы и рекомендации по истории саамов с упоминанием ряда источников. ; The article focuses on Sámi history and historical methods. The main results and central aspects of Sámi history, in its relational context, are gone through. What effects and consequences – regarding both methodology and narrative styles – these aspects have had, and ought to have, for the processes of doing research on and writing Sámi history? The focus is on the politics of Sámi history and research. The issues, who is "allowed" to write Sámi history and the way Sámi research is demanded to stand in the ser-vice of different societal-cultural needs of the Sámi is dealt with. This expectation of applicability concerns Sámi history in general, and the more delimited efforts of presenting situated accounts of Sámi cultural practices, traditions and experience with relations to other folk groups. Finally, methodological considera-tions and recommendations of Sámi history are presented, in which a number of methodological competences and in-Depth usage of numerous Source categories are called for.

Source at: http://doi.org/10.17238/issn2221-2698.2017.27.117 ; The article focuses on Sámi history and historical methods. The main results and central aspects of Sámi history, in its relational context, are gone through. What effects and consequences — regarding both methodology and narrative styles — these aspects have had, and ought to have, for the processes of doing research on and writing Sámi history? The focus is on the politics of Sámi history and research. The issues, who is "allowed" to write Sámi history and the way Sámi research is demanded to stand in the service of different societal-cultural needs of the Sámi is dealt with. This expectation of applicability concerns Sámi history in general, and the more delimited efforts of presenting situated accounts of Sámi cultural practices, traditions and experience with relations to other folk groups. Finally, methodological considerations and recommendations of Sámi history are presented, in which a number of methodological competences and in-depth usage of numerous source categories are called for.

This article focuses upon the delimitation between the separate farm units and the collectively exploited common lands ('allmenninger') in Southeastern Norway during Medieval times. In these commons, various kind of resources – like pastures, woodland and fisheries – were accessible for exploitation by a majority of farmers in the settlement community, but subject to more restrictions than the resources of the 'outlying fields' pertaining to the separate farms. While the majority of the farmers within the community preferred that the extension of the commons should be preserved for their convenience, two groups of farmers might appropriate parts of the original common land area: those cultivating farms bordering to the common area, and who might extend their separate farmland successively into the previous commonly held area, and landless people who wanted to establish new farms ('clearances') within the common land. The legislation was also double and ambiguous. On the one hand it stated that 'the commons [should] stay in the way they have been before'. On the other hand it was declared that a farmer establishing a farm as a new clearing in the commons should become the King's tenant and thus come under his protection. The processes behind the institutionalizing of boundaries between the commons and private farm properties are highlighted through an analysis of settlement development in two municipalities/parishes in Southeastern Norway.

The End of Drum‐Time. Håkan Rydving.The Varanger Saami: Habitation and Economy A.D. 1200–1900. Knut Odner.

AbstractDuring the eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the Sami and the Kvens were classified and categorized in different ways by the Norwegian state authorities in their official censuses. The process whereby various categorization principles were applied was heavily imbued with ideological and political considerations. During the eighteenth century, when main concern was establishing and consolidating the borders of the state, a kind of geographical enclosure and delimitation took place. During the nineteenth century and through to the Second World War, however, the overriding ambition was to depict all the inhabitants within these established borders as being as culturally homogeneous as possible. Today, it has once more become desirable to acknowledge the presence of both the Sami and the Kvens.

When researchers want to study indigenous populations they are dependent upon the highly variable way in which states or territories enumerate, categorise and differentiate indigenous people. In this volume, anthropologists, historians, demographers and sociologists have come together for the first time to examine the historical and contemporary construct of indigenous people in a number of fascinating geographical contexts around the world, including Canada, the United States, Colombia, Russia, Scandinavia, the Balkans and Australia. Using historical and demographical evidence, the contributors explore the creation and validity of categories for enumerating indigenous populations, the use and misuse of ethnic markers, micro-demographic investigations, and demographic databases, and thereby show how the situation varies substantially between countries